In considerably less than twenty-5 months, Parliament has performed vetting and permitted twelve, which include five ladies and a Main Justice, to the Supreme Courtroom of Ghana.
Earlier in 2017 and later just after the generation of the 6 new regions, it did a very similar work approving an historic and weird a person hundred and more than a double-dozen ministers and their deputies for this tiny ‘poor’ place.
Apart from candidates for Lawyer-Typical, there are no particular techniques set or academic qualifications for the ministerial positions. Just one will have to on the other hand be an MP or be experienced to be elected an MP.
But to be an MP you fulfill problems in post 94 of the Constitution which include tax compliance and not owning been convicted for crimes involving fraud, dishonesty, and moral turpitude (i.e. an act or actions that gravely violates the sentiment or accepted conventional of the community).
All the more than 125 nominees handed the task interview and that is normally anticipated, however surprisingly. But today’s report is about vetting judges. Their job, as once noticed by a Chief Justice, is far more like acquire the part of God on earth as some may possibly have accomplished in the Bible.
The central qualification to be a judge, according to the Structure, is to be “a person of significant moral character and proven integrity”. A choose swears an oath to retain fidelity to the legislation and dispense justice to all method of individuals without having worry or favour, sick-will or passion.
The issue is, do our MPs do anything close to assuring us, the folks they approve, in actuality, go the moral character and tested integrity exams? In the current exercise routines, it is undoubted that most of the judge candidates have identified established track documents whilst some may perhaps even be overqualified.
But how quite a few of the MPs shown a search for a vetting to advantage the nation? Why must it get only opposition MPs to inquire seeking concerns, and where by their probing give citizens a feeling of someone who may possibly not be suit for the sacred job of a judge, they nonetheless get approved?
More youthful individuals follow the vetting and may well go absent with the thinking our culture does not abhor permit alone punish those who do not maintain to obvious standards and ethics. They may perhaps go absent finding affirmation that this is not a modern society of meritocracy.
The MPs who sit in those vetting periods shouting the praise of nominees do so devoid of a feeling of embarrassment, and that’s a sad reflection of our culture. Judges are public business holders but are barely in the public eye and imagined not to be subject to the principles of community accountability.
I have spoken and written many instances in defence of judges and the judiciary especially when they have arrive beneath vile assaults by wicked partisans and ignoramuses.
But I am not unaware of the complications highlighted by Anas Aremeyaw Anas exposing judges who breached their oath and code of perform with impunity. The judge range approach has enhanced a little bit with advertisements requesting members of the general public to object to candidates.
Still our MPs have an even higher responsibility to make sure the higher transparency envisioned in the approach for those people nominated to provide in the Supreme Court. Try to remember a solitary indiscretion or act of travesty of justice of a person decide can plunge this country quite a few many years again in its democratic journey.
Samson Lardy ANYENINI
May perhaps 30, 2020
